While there is plenty of scope for justifiable criticism about the form of the amendment that’s going ahead, it’s too late for that argument to achieve much. The wording is set, the date is set, the taxpayer money is already being spent.

Since it is going ahead anyway, do you think voting no will make governments revisit further steps in the future faster than a yes vote?

Personally, I doubt it would. Progress is more likely to be gained by having something, no matter how small, already in place so that a future amendment can build on it, rather than trying for something more substantial from scratch.

Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom were both great games, with good story (if a little cutesy, but it’s aimed at being family friendly), not even really any allusion to sex.

A bit yes and no with TOTK I think.

Time to use Lay on Hands.

It’s difficult. But interesting trivia: his dad was the only judge to ever be removed from office by an Australian parliament. https://insidestory.org.au/judging-vasta/

The summary missed an important part that makes this ridiculous:

During the same interview, Ms Keen-Minshull had said she would likely not have time to pursue legal action against Mr Pesutto over his comments.

This is basically what I do as well.

One thing I find useful is to list your party’s Perception modifiers, use the formula above for a random d20 result for each PC, then add them together (for example, =B2+C2). Then when they walk into a room, hit F9 for an instant whole-party secret Perception roll.

The moon needed to be de-nazified.

On June 9, 2022, Fagan had been drinking when she drove erratically…

Fagan, who gave birth last month

That’s either a very poor life choice, or a very deliberate life choice for someone facing prison time.

The barbarian isn’t going to just say “I roll athletics” without explaining what they are trying to achieve. Same for persuasion. “I try to convince the mayor we are experienced enough adventurers to assist” is enough to let the GM know what the intention is and give context for the NPC’s possible reponse.

Out of interest, what are some masculine traits that you feel are being rejected by society?

I understand the “build it and they will come” mentality. Without a place to start those discussions, I presume they won’t start at all.

I suppose it’s a bit of a question about how do we define what a sub is for and let people know? Even then, no guarantee people will run with it.

I think legally-themed communities are prone to falling into the pit of people asking for legal advice on the internet at the best of times. I know the mods at the auslaw subreddit, despite as clearly as possible saying “no legal advice, no real lawyer is going to answer you,” spend plenty of time removing legal advice requests or people saying “not asking for legal advice, but hypothetically, if I had a kg of meth down my pants, could the police search me? Just hypothetically?”

There will always be exceptions, for example for disabilities or medical conditions. Most of those exceptions will be more accessible to wealthy or influential families that can afford to pay off doctors than poorer families.

Even if the Uluru Statement was 200 pages long and called for white slavery, it would still be misleading for Sky News to imply it has any relevance to what is actually being voted on in the Voice referendum. The wording of the proposed constitutional amendment is only about 4 paragraphs long, and has already been set by Parliament.

People won’t stop just using social media.

We are discussing whether we should stop using social media via social media.

Nothing I’ll hasn’t been covered in some way already. These are based on my personal experience, so might not reflect everyone’s experience. It’s also been a few years now, so the market might have changed.

As everyone else has said, a broker is a good first step to see what sort of budget you have to play with. I’ve always had good experiences with brokers, and they make the borrowing process easier as well.

Once you have a budget, start looking at places. I would recommend not to rush into it. The more you look, the better sense you will get for the market and what things are worth. Go to some auctions, see how they flow and the final prices. Eventually you should get a somewhat decent sense for what something will go for as soon as you look at it based on size, location, quality, etc.

Agents might underquote (advertise places for less than the vendor will actually sell for) to generate interest. Don’t be all that surprised if the final price is higher

Obviously never spend more than you can afford. But the more important bit of advice I got was: don’t pay more for a property than it’s worth.

If they think they can, agents will push you to bump up your offer. They want you to get emotionally invested in a place before squeezing you for a higher price. They’ll say things like “if you don’t give your best offer, you’ll miss out.”

There’ll be lots of places you like, but someone will offer more. It feels bad when it happens, but never let yourself get sucked into spending more than a place is really worth. You might be paying off that mortgage for 20-30 years and regretting it. Set yourself a price that you think is reasonable, and hold yourself to it. If the agent tries to get you higher just tell them it’s more than you think it’s worth and the other buyer can have it if they think it’s worth more.

is virulent anti-renewables and, like many of his Coalition partners, pro nuclear

I’m guessing that the consequences of one of those being subjected to a cyber attack/sabotage is not on par with the other.

The 25% casual loading is calculated to take in notice of termination and redundancy pay too. Lots of people resign and fewer are made redundant, so wouldn’t get notice or redundancy pay anyway. That means in most circumstances, employees are better off in a pure money sense as casuals.

The big downside is if things are quiet at work you aren’t guaranteed any hours. As you mention, that also creates a hurdle when applying for loans.

Unfortunately the reference to full-time is sloppy reporting from the Guardian. The quotes from the Minister only mention converting to ‘permanent’ work

Currently casuals working regular part-time hours are supposed to be offered permanent part-time work. I doubt they’ll be changing that.

What would you expect the union to do? One of the union’s roles is to protect the health and safety of its members. If taking the books off the shelves stops the abuse, I suspect they would support the move.

Nice try David McCormack. Back to being a cartoon dog for you.